Skip to comments.Sotomayor issues blistering dissent, says Republican-appointed justices have bias toward Trump administration
Posted on 02/23/2020 8:11:13 AM PST by PROCON
Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a scathing rebuke of the court's decision to allow the Trump administration to enforce its "public charge" rule in the state of Illinois, limiting which non-citizens can obtain visas to enter the U.S.
Sotomayor's problems with the conservative majority's ruling went far beyond this case, claiming that it was symptomatic of the court's habit of siding with the government when they seek emergency stays of rulings against them.
"It is hard to say what is more troubling: that the Government would seek this extraordinary relief seemingly as a matter of course, or that the Court would grant it," Sotomayor wrote in her dissent.
This particular case, Wolf v. Cook County, deals with the Trump administration's expansion of situations where the government can deny visas to non-citizens looking to enter the U.S. Federal law already says that officials can take into account whether an applicant is likely to become a "public charge," which government guidance has said refers to someone "primarily dependent on the government for subsistence. In the past, non-cash benefits such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), forms of Medicaid, and certain housing assistance did not count, but the Department of Homeland Security issued its new public charge rule in 2019 which did include these benefits.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
A not-so-wise Latina speaks....
The Wide Latina is feeling the heat.
Well, cry me a river.
Of course, she is unbiased toward liberalism.
Perhaps a stern public message from Chief “Justice” Roberts’ handlers to get more with the pogrom.
I thought the President was in charge of immigration and stuff. But apparently she thinks the judges can decide it for him.
Justice Sotomayors problem with biased justices is probably that they are complying with the Constitution.
Finally, Someone has admitted Bias on the SCOTUS. That means it goes BOTH ways, Sotolicker.
Calls to mind a joke (paraphrased below) from Andrew Dice Clay (yeah, I know he's not everyone's "cup of tea"):
Why doesn't Sotomayor wear a watch?
Because there's clock on the [effin] stove!
As she tries to destroy basic American values.
It’s been the law for decades, it’s just that no one before Trump would enforce it.
That she dissented is not the issue we ought focus upon. The real issue is her being unfit for the highest court because she is blatantly biased while upbraiding the court ... she is not High Court material, but she is just the kind of dead soul puppet the demon rats love.
Did she mention the Rooskie influence on the GOPee court members?
And she has a bias towards anyone from Mexico or parts South of there.
She would rip apart the border of the Junited Estates if she could, since their one overwhelming obsession is to get into the Gringo paradise and shake them down for their dinero.
Cuz after all, “dees ees ahr lahnd”
And that’s all the Hispanic Supremacist is about. And the main reason she doesn’t belong on our Court.
As I said on another thread, Sotomayor isnt stupid. She knows exactly why the Court has had to step in so often with this President. The lower courts are out of control and many such judges think of themselves as part of the resistance. But shes being a good, little Marxist and using this to stir up the fools.
She was arguing that laws passed by Congress multiple times should not be enforced. I dont even think she argued the laws were unConstitutional.
I believe the correct response is...Elections have consequences...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.